| |
UT1HZM > BBS 12.01.21 11:31l 71 Lines 2839 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3874_UT1HZM
Read: GAST
Subj: Re: 7Plus suggestions
Path: DB0FFL<OE2XZR<OE5XBL<DB0RBS<DB0ERF<DB0RES<ON0AR<VK6HGR<OK2PEN<OK0PBR<
UT1HZM
Sent: 210112/1001Z 3874@UT1HZM.KREM.POL.UKR.EU BPQ6.0.20
Hi Red et all.
> From: PE1RRR@PE1RRR.#NBW.NLD.EURO
> To : BBS@WW
>
> Hi,
>
> I have just one counterpoint to add to this suggestion:
>
> > Better to send less number of parts but say of 20-30Kb size!
>
> Absolutely not. Reason being that there are still folks, in their 60s
> using old TNCS to manually download 7pl messages in software like the
> well renouned Paket6.2. Some old TNCs occasionally flip bits, this is
> why 7plus has the ERR correction mechanism.
Sorry, can't agree. If them do 7plus job manually, its de-facto simpler
to make/collect/parse/process less big sized parts, than tens of small.
As for the occurrence of an error in parts, this has nothing to do with
their size, error can happens anyway and message will forwarded though
network first, then only processed for possible errors.
Also as we have mesh-type BBS network, according by its own essence,
it is likely that if there are more parts, then there is a greater
likelihood of losing some of them!
And counting that not all 7plus bulls senders may have proper configured
recovery utility (to re-send requested missed parts),
its also better send less number of parts!
> We cannot ask these OMs to "update their hardware" as many of them are
> old, and you may not like this but but as one gets elderly learning
> new things is just almost impossible, it just comes with the territory
> of getting older. They can't help it. So its not fair to them to tell
> them, 'yo man, get a new TNC' or 'yo, update to windows 10 and install
> software TNC' because they CAN'T.
>
I'm too know those OMs but some of them who finnally updated to s/w tnc
was totally happy and say just "why i'm not done it before?" :)
> The point of 7pl being in small chunks is to allow the messages to
> be decoded manually by those who have to, and still do. Do you want
Its not a point, see two paragraphs above.
The only true point for small parts was from time where we not have so much AX/UDP/Telnet.
Most job was done on 300bd HF channels and/or on VHF 1k2 long range links,
say via 2-4 net/rom digis in line.
So the smaller parts was less stop mail flow and give chance to fwd some other mails
between 7plus chunks.
For today its have almost no practical sense, as most links are AX/UDP/Telnet
and most software also have possibility to put in first order private msgs and small bulls.
> Have yo uever tried to download a 30kb message over VHF 1K2
> and then multiple parts, and still not get a working file?
>
30kb - not a problem for 1k2.
Some ugly 20 years old KISS TNCs or poor s/w AX.25 stack maybe a problem,
but its the problem of its system operator, not a problem of 1k2 speed itself :-)
73, Sergej.
P.S. to all: please not change bull area - its harder to track discussion.
So, if topic stater send Q to ALL@WW, please reply to ALL@WW also.
Lese vorherige Mail | Lese naechste Mail
| |
